States controls do not hurt legal ownership of guns

To the editor:

What’s the big deal over gun control? Controls in no way take the right to bear and own arms.

I relate gun control laws to automobile control laws and there are a lot of those (just read the driver’s education manual.) When the automobile was first invented, there were very few laws concerning its use, but laws were enacted as needed.

As more and more people drove automobiles, and automobiles were developed to go faster and faster they were soon recognized as potential lethal weapons. Look at how many laws we have to learn in order to be licensed to drive one – speed limits, road signs, one-way streets, no parking, handicap parking, traffic lights, right of way, no tailgating, no ice on the roof, no passing school buses, yielding to fire trucks and ambulances, lights on in the rain and construction sites, avoiding a police car parked on the berm, no texting, etc., etc., and there undoubtedly will be more laws enacted as needed. Automobiles have to be registered and pass inspections. These laws in no way take away anyone’s right to own an automobile.

I believe in the Second Amendment wholeheartedly. We should be able to own guns to protect ourselves, our families and our properties (look out, Mr. Intruder.) All guns should be registered and licensed, just as automobiles. People should pass certain tests to own guns just as they do automobiles. Guns that are designed as weapons of war should be confined to the home and permits issued for them to be transported to areas of practice. Guns in the home should be out of the reach of minors. None of these regulations take away the right to bear arms.

Automobile laws do not prevent death and injuries on the highways. Neither will gun control prevent all deaths and injuries. But both controls surely will cut down on the incidents leading to the senseless slaughter of innocent people. If you agree, you should call or write to your senator.

Marianne Hornyak